Subject: [ietf-dkim] IANA considerations...

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 23:32:57 +0100

That section implies IANA will establish a new registry. Has
anyone asked them and if not, will someone volunteer?

Stephen.

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 21:51:26 -0400

>anyone asked them and if not, will someone volunteer?

No one needs to "ask IANA"; the spec tells them and they do it. This 
section needs to be expanded to be specific; otherwise, the spec will 
get delayed in IESG review.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 00:41:00 -0400

> get delayed in IESG review.

The last time I did an RFC that specified an IANA registry, IANA came
back asking for specific instructions as to things like change control
instructions (who could make changes and additions), how updates must be
specified (an RFC, a standards track RFC, an email to IANA, etc.), and
what information must be included with a registered value.

We don't need to ask IANA to set up the registry; as Paul says, if the
RFC says to do so, they will do so.

However, IANA *does* review the IANA Considerations section. And they
may ask for specific changes to be made before the I-D will be passed on
to the RFC Editor.

IANA review can begin whenever we ask them to review it, and can occur
in parallel with or before IESG review. Either way, it must occur before
the RFC Editor accepts it. If we don't ask them to do it beforehand,
they'll get involved during or after the IESG review.

>From my interactions with them, I can report that they actually *like*
getting involved earlier in the process.

	Tony Hansen
	[email-masked]